Professor Alexander Orakhelashvili discusses the jurisdictional argument raised in the Ukraine v Russia case before the ICJ
In an earlier post, I addressed the International Court’s provisional measures order in Ukraine v Russia. Since then, 32 States have intervened to support the applicant State’s position. Oral proceedings at the preliminary objections stage have been concluded and raised multiple issues of interpretation and application of the Genocide Convention. I discuss those issues in turn.
The scope of the compromissory clause
Russia has invaded Ukraine claiming, among others, that the latter was committing genocide in Eastern Ukraine. Pretty much without adducing supporting evidence, Germany has suggested to the that, apart from disputes as to compliance by States-parties with the Genocide Convention, “Article IX of the Genocide Convention also covers disputes in which one State party of the Convention alleges that another State party is committing acts of genocide and where, relying on such accusations, the former State party then takes action in the form of using military force against the latter.” (Germany CR2023/15, 37) Read full article...
Professor of International Law
Profile of Birmingham Law School academic, Dr Alexander Orakhelashvili, Professor of International Law
